Russell Westbrook back on top of SI’s rookie rankings: “Count Nuggets coach George Karl among those who believe 
Westbrook has caught up to Rose and warrants serious Rookie of the Year consideration. “I like his stride, his power, his courage to learn a new position,” Karl told the Denver Post. “I think by March and April, I’m going with Westbrook.” Westbrook, who is adjusting to playing full time as a point guard, committed a season-high eight turnovers in Saturday’s loss to Phoenix. Therein lies the obvious rub with the raw playmaker: His eye-popping 226 giveaways in 67 games (3.4 average) rank second only to Dwyane Wade.”
Is Jeff Green the NBA version of Evengi Malkin? (that’s a hockey player): “It really seems like he’s doing somethinguseful in every single play, and his mark on a game is singular and unmistakable for this Thunder team. There’s a definite Swiss-army-like quality of utter utility to the guy, but somehow- even given the flashes we’ve seen of his true potential thusfar- he remains an undefined specimen. It’s like he’s a secondary (or even tertiary) figure in a mythology he’s helping to build. Green’s game is like a Funk Brothers Motown track, or an unwritten gospel… I’ve been struggling to find a proper illustrative analog from within the Association, but it turns out that the athlete who most frequently comes to mind when I consider Green isn’t actually a basketball player at all. Jeff Green really reminds me most of Evengi Malkin, the NHL center for the Pittsburgh Penguins.”
Take 15 minutes (or 20, depending on how fast you read) and digest this fanpost from Sactown Royalty. It’s got a few ties to OKC and really kind of illuminates the lunacy and hypocrisy of so many people openly talking about moving franchises while still casting stones at Oklahoma City: “Longevity can’t be the only criteria, though. As we’ve all seen, a bedrock franchise with storied history, All-Star players, and established ties to the community can still be ripped from a city like Seattle, basically at the whim of ownership. When discussing the egregiousness of any potential move, fan support has to be considered as well. (Incidentally, you’ve been pretty vocal in opposition to the Sonics move to OKC–no friends at the Oklahoman, I guess?)”
I feel horrible about taking some kind of strange satisfaction in this: “New Orleans is 9-3 since his return. However, he has not played of late with the spark that led to his having three double-doubles in his first seven games back — when he averaged 9.9 points and 10.1 rebounds — and during the Hornets’ current two-game losing streak, Chandler has averaged four points and eight rebounds. “My ankle is banged up, but I’m going to continue to try and play through it, ” Chandler said. “But it’s definitely affecting me, because a lot of the stuff I get comes from energy and hustle, and I don’t feel like I’m able to do that.” Chandler and Hornets Coach Byron Scott said Chandler’s sprained left ankle, which forced him to miss 14 consecutive games in January and February, has not fully healed. And with the Hornets’ bench continuing to play ineffectively, Scott does not appear to have many options. However, he said if Chandler’s ankle continues to affect his mobility and performance, he would consider playing him fewer minutes, opting to use reserve Sean Marks.”
Tom Ziller writing on the potential of the NBA contracting: “The NBA has two or three current markets with serious problems: Memphis (the real ghoul), Charlotte (which may never recover from the Shinn departure) and Indiana (dying). Memphis probably shouldn’t have a pro team, and needs a new owner badly. Should we blow the thing up? No! Other markets are dyingto host the NBA. Look at the lengths Oklahoma City went to in order to have a team. Clay Bennett basically ruined his national reputation because bringing the Sonics to OKC would make him a local hero. Think about that. Bringing the NBA to Okla-fricking-homa made the dude a hero. The man had to resort to a completely shady tactics to spring the Sonics free because the demand for local NBA basketball was so high in two markets. (Unless you think, Dave, that Seattle didn’t want to keep the Sonics …)”
Ziller wrote that in response to BlazersEdge, who says OKC should vanish (but only as an “example”): “The six teams I’m going to use are Sacramento, Memphis, Indiana, Charlotte, Minnesota, and Oklahoma City. OKC actually has decent attendance this year but there’s no history there and nothing to indicate that this won’t become another Memphis/Vancouver situation of declining support after the initial blush has worn off. In any case, if you don’t like a team’s inclusion just throw them out and put in the Clippers or Bucks or Hawks instead.”
Looks like “ksmoove35″ was a fake Twitterer, because it is no longer there.
Ball Don’t Lie is looking at NBA potential in this year’s NCAA tournament: “Blake Griffin has no weight, for he is light as a feather and yet heavy as a ox. Blake Griffin has no height, for his leaps are impossible to measure. Blake Griffin has no age, for he is both Alpha and Omega, the first and the last. In short, even if you only ever watch the NBA, you probably don’t need me to tell you how good Blake Griffin is at basketball. He’s really, really, really good, and you should watch him play, and then hope your team drafts him. It’s really just that simple.”
A British publication weighs in on the “Should the Blazers have taken Durant” non-argument and why KD doesn’t get more mention: “Already this season, Durant has 14 double-doubles. His tally for last term: zero. He is showing all the traits of a potential All-World performer. So why is everyone not jumping up and down to hail his progress? To quote Kirstie and Phil: Location. Location. Location. If he were playing in New York, they’d be erecting billboards on the sides of buildings to hype it up. For most, Oklahoma might as well be Mars. “I try not to worry about that,” Durant states, though. “If I get better, and our team gets better, as the years go on, it’s going to speak for itself.”
Ric Bucher was on Jim Traber’s show yesterday and they talked a little bit about Bill Simmons (via OKC Thunder Fans): “Anyone catch Traber rippin Bill Simmons on the radio at about 4PM? He was on with Rick Bucher (ESPN) who is in town to do a story on the Thunder and the path they’re on. Traber told Bucher that there are a lot of people in OK that want to rip Simmons’ head off for the “team/city that shall remain nameless”. Bucher did agree that Seattle had every opportunity to keep the team…and didn’t. …and he said Clay Bennett wasn’t even to blame.”
Fantasy junkies are catching notice of OKC’s attractive lineup: “Oklahoma City now trots out its own up-and-coming “big three” of Kevin Durant, Jeff Green and Russell Westbrook. If Green and Westbrook can take the step Durant did this season — mainly shoring up field goal percentage — they both will be top-40 players by next All-Star Weekend. But the other member of the Thunder who has grabbed fantasy interest of late is Thabo Sefolosha. Since coming to Oklahoma City, he has provided a new level of defensive intensity, which was on display during last night’s upset of the Spurs. Sefolosha, averaging 3.2 steals and 1.2 blocks over his past five games, is the rare fantasy player who doesn’t need 10 shot attempts a night to be a force.”
ESPN award watch with Westbrook sitting in second for ROY and Durant at two for Most Improved: “Before the season started, it wouldn’t have been a stretch to predict that the Thunder were going to challenge the NBA record for fewest wins. Thanks to the leadership and all-around solid play of Westbrook, and the steadily improving play of Jeff Green and Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City, winner of six of its past nine, is a better-than-expected 19-48.”
And if you’re looking for something to waste your life with, participate in the Name of the Year. It’s incredibly entertaining and it looks like there’s going to be some stiff competition with Barkevious Mingo, Taco Vandervelde and Nutritious Love. But this is Rev. Valentine Handwerker’s tournament to lose.
Vega,
it is a lottery system, we have less of a chance if we keep winning, but we still have a slim chance regardless . . .
No way in heck that we lose enough to get the number one pick to get Griffin, and even if we go on a losing streak, Sacramento and Memphis are going to lose more.
If Blake is as big as listed (same size as Al Horford), he could become our starting center, which is just as big of a need as a pure point guard. That's why we take him over Rubio. He's the better player, and just as big of a need.
that probably didnt come out right - Even though I prefer to have Rubio at the point (or Lawson, etc) , I think Blake adds more to the team than a pure point guard would . . .
I guess we have to agree to disagree -
I'd take Griffin over Rubio in a heartbeat, and I prefer a natural point over a "combo" guard . . .
I didn't say we wouldn't make Green a 6th man, just that I doubt there are plans to do so.
It goes back to the same opinion I had on our larger thread earlier, about drafting Griffin. I don't think Griffin is a big need for this team because we have Green. It would be an upgrade, yes. But not as big of an upgrade as Rubio running the point.
Very good point, Kev. We can talk about this player and this player at X position, but we can't pretend that even when healthy that this is a championship team yet. Ultimately, the Thunder can't afford to pass on a better player simply because someone else is entrenched at that position. Has Thabo had a great impact on the team? Yes. Would I pass on Harden if he was available after the first two picks? No. Is Green currently a core member of the team? Yes. Would I pass on an all-star PF because of him? No.
That's really the case for all our players besides Durant. And in Durant's case, it's simply because the very very few SFs better than him would never be traded. This team has a good thing going, but good thing and contending team are very different. We need to be honest with ourselves that a number of the players that we may like on this team will not be around when we are annually making a run in the playoffs, and that everyone is on the block if it makes us a better team.
The team is good right now - but you can't say that so and so cant be a 6th man - Green would be a good 6th man if a (very good) post player came along . . . no one is a bigger Thabo fan than me, but ideally he's a 6th - 7th man (until he improves his outside shooting) . . .
Jeff Green reminds me of Lamar Odom with better range...He just needs to develop his post moves (which odly enough was his focus in college)....
If we're looking to bolster our bench, I see us trading down. I still think we'll fall into the top 6, and you don't use a top 6 pick as a bench acquisition.
I really doubt there are any plans to make Green a 6th man.
I think there is no way in heck we draft a guy like Monroe. Presti's history has proven that if you don't play defense, he's not interested. His history also shows that he's willing to draft on pure athleticism, than to draft a non-athlete with skills (see the Westbrook and Ibaka picks).
Defense and rebounds and athleticism are the three things that most easily translate from the college game to the pros. Which is why I think we'll still draft a conference defensive player of the year, or conference rebound leader.
Presti drafts hard workers too. The improvements Durant and Green have made indicate they're willing to work harder than your average young player. If a guy like AI was available to draft, Presti wouldn't do it, because he doesn't love practice, and wouldn't be the first one to arrive and the last to leave. Find that guy in the draft, the guy who wants to set up a cot in the gym and not go home, and he's the guy we'll draft.
Also, you can't forget about the D-League. While we probably won't find the next Ramon Sessions on the 66ers, we may find a decent bench player; Gary Forbes and Steven Hill might make it in the big leagues. Speaking of which, what happened to Steven Hill? According to the D-League site, he hasn't played since January. Is he injured?
The big knock on big men rated high is that so few of them seem to fit what the Thunder need. The Thunder need a few things. One, they need a center (unless Green is going to be fine as a sixth man). Two, they need a down low scorer whose interior presence makes things easier for our wing players. Three, we need someone who can play solid defense against opposing bigs and rebound like crazy.
In fact, Blake is the only guy who you could say can do all that, and that's assuming his size and defensive ability is not overrated by the hype. Monroe could be a scorer, but he likes to shoot jumpers and is very disinterested on defense. Hill is a good rebounder and defender, but he's smaller than Green and looks lost a lot during plays. Thabeet is a shot-blocker and rebounder, but also incredibly soft and non-existent on offense.
The next best bigs are all in the late lottery range. Blair is strong, but is severely limited by his size in the NBA. Aldrich is a taller, slower Kevin Love - good all around player, could have a very rough transition to the NBA. B.J. Mullens is physically amazing, but doesn't really do anything well, not ready for the NBA.
Don't expect any star players to be sent here. The core is set. No more stars are needed. The main focus will be on assembling a super bench that playoffs teams like Cleveland, Portland, LA, San Antonio, Denver, Orlando, etc, have. That means good, solid role players, which this draft may end up being chock full of. I think our Nuggets pick could yield a solid backup point guard, (Mills, Flynn.) while the lotto pick will likely give us either a project/questionable center, (Monroe, Thabeet) or, a backup to Durant. (Earl Clark.)
You see, the starting lineup is pretty much set. Durant is the star, Russ is the explosive combo guard, Green is the utility player, Thabo is the defensive stopper, and Krstic is the solid center. The bench is what needs work. An Earl Watson replacement, a backup center, and a decent backup to Durant are all required. This draft could, potentially, fill all of those main needs. I don't think any blockbuster trades are necessary. Let's just sit back and let Presti work his magic, either with the draft, or with Thabo-esque trades.
If our pick is forth or worse, I like the idea of trading it for a big man. If Presti was able to get Chandler for 2 expiring contracts, who might we get for the 4-6 pick and expiring contracts?(i.e. Watson, Wilkens, Atkins)
With so many teams having financial problems and/or positioning for the summer of Lebron, could we pick up an Al Jefferson?
I think next year we transition from being in rebuilding mode to making a hard push for being a playoff team.
@Vega
Monroe definitely is the biggest question mark on the board, both negatively and positively. He definitely has had documented issues about motivation and initiating contact both offensively and defensively (too many times he passes the ball away when he's in the post and feet from the basket instead of attacking the rim), but he's also the best pure passing big man and has unreal upside.
If the Thunder get the second or third pick, and are set on Westbrook as an NBA PG, Monroe will get a LONG look and be the source of a lot of discussion.
Kev, it's going to depend on who picks where. Washington, for example, is not going to have much use for a top pick, especially given their luxury tax situation. They have Arenas at the 1 (supposedly), Jamison at the 4, and even Haywood kind of entrenched at the 5. Griffin could probably beat out Haywood, but then the Wizards are paying almost 12 million in luxury tax money for a still mediocre-at-best team. Washington would probably be up for trading if they could shed one or two of their bad contracts in the process.
Also the Clippers, despite being terrible, have established starters at every position. They need someone to replace Dunleavy more than they need another high draft pick. And assuming they have the first pick (Griffin), the last thing they need is another big man who won't get any minutes behind Camby, Kaman, and Randolph. A package of Thunder picks plus perhaps taking back a big contract they don't want (Camby) could be rather attractive to them.
Don't underestimate the impact of us having the cap room to take back contracts other teams don't want.
Technically, Jax, the Sonics picked Green fifth, since they had already come to an agreement on the Ray Allen trade with the Celtics. Thus, the Celtics effectively asked Presti and Co. who they wanted with the fifth pick and made the pick for them.
I think if we have the third or fouth pick, we try to trade up. Anything after that and you'll have to give up too much. Plus, picks 3-7 really won't be much different in potential/proven production in terms of value.
where would he play? he would come off the bench to spell Green and Durant - he's probably not worth it . . .
Patty Mills would be an excellent Earl Watson replacement. I don't like the idea of trading the lotto pick. I still think that Monroe would be a decent choice. He may have problems with his game, but the dude is only 19. I think he could be molded to fit our system. Or we could draft a backup SF like Earl Clark.
I had an idea last night. Channing Frye is going to be a restricted free agent at the end of the season, and I doubt that Portland will bother to re-sign him. Would he work in OKC?
From Thunder Rumblings at NewsOK:
The Thunder has assigned rookie forward D.J. White to the Tulsa 66ers, its D-League affiliate.
White, the 29th overall pick, has yet to play in this year because of jaw surgery. He was cleared by team doctors on Monday to resume full-contact practices and games after having not played or practiced since before the start of training camp.
Thunder officials made the move hoping that White can get his timing back in Tulsa and receive more playing time than he likely would recevive in Oklahoma City.
White is expected to rejoin the team before the end of the season and make his debut with the Thunder.
-DM-
Keith,
and this is assuming Rubio declares - I don't see any team getting one of the top two picks trading down - you said it yourself this draft has a bunch of question marks . . . and who would trade up to 6-9 for the same reason?
Even though the draft is suspect, Presti will find a decent player wherever we draft . . .
So I'm looking for opinions on this. At what pick is it worth trying to trade up, and at what pick are we better off trading down or trading the pick(s) for veterans?
Now to some degree it's going to be dependent on who gets the top picks, but we can't simply overlook how much better certain players are than others, and the local flavor of a Blake Griffin.
I'd say if we land the 4 or 5 pick, we should try to trade up. The players likely available there are big men with big question marks. I could easily see Harden being scooped up at 3 (and Harden is the lowest rated player I see being worth a top 5 pick). If none of the top teams are willing to trade, I think we'd be better off using the pick to pry away a highly paid young talent (Biedrins, Kaman, Chandler) or in a package for a star big man on a rebuilding team (Bosh, Amare).
If we land a pick in the 6-9 range, I think we should trade down while trying to grab another solid role player, specifically a three point specialist. In this range the pick still has decent value in a trade but the actual talent differential between a pick here and in the late lottery isn't that large for our team.
Ironically, I only think we should use the pick to actually pick someone if we land in the 10+ range (other teams tank and a team or two jump us in the lottery). At this point, given the perceived weakness of the draft, the pick doesn't hold a whole lot of value and it will be less likely that we can trade down effectively. Also, around here we will still have our pick of all the second tier talents at every position. We can grab a position of need over "best player available" because all players around here are about equal in their talent v risk measure.
Also, Green was drafted 5th by the Celtics.
I have a feeling that if we fall outside the top 5 picks, we'll end up with another conference defensive player of the year selection. Probably from a team that doesn't play strictly zone defense.
OR, we'll end up trading our pick for another Thabo who rides the bench of a team who doesn't know what they're sitting on.
great discussion . . .
March is a great basketball month - not only do I watch to see what teams win, I watch to see NBA prospects in action . . . I hope Lawson actually gets to play this weekend . . .
Green was considered a top 10 pick in the 2007 draft. Most mock draft sites had him going #6 to the Bucks. But your point is definitely spot on, Presti's eye for talent is uncanny.
Yeah the Chandler story is starting to develop a bit. And that's after people were writing yesterday about what a job he'd done. Oops.
At this point, I don't even have anxiety that we won't get Blake Griffin. If we don't, then I completely trust Presti to evaluate the talent in the draft and get a steal. Besides Durant, who was the obvious #2 pick, look at underrated players the Thunder have found:
Green (I don't remember him being a Top 10 player in KD's draft)
Westbrook (laughed at as the #4 pick)
Sefolosha (perpetually on the bench in Chicago)
Weaver (2nd Round steal, easily one of the top 20 rookies)
Rose (great glue guy, still has some gas left in the tank)
...and we still get to see DJ White make his debut in the near future.
Whether it's Harden, Mills, Rubio, or some other player, I know we'll get the right player for our system and for our style of play, regardless of what conventional wisdom is.
And it's starting to look like we might have dodged a bullet with the Chandler trade. Whew.
Only problem with Ty Lawson is that, well, he really has no range on his jumpshot. I see that as a problem on a team that wants to spread the floor with shooters and run. But he is the engine of UNC and the truest definition of PG in the draft (other than Rubio, of course).
And if Johnny Flynn from Syracuse is 6'0 then I'm 8 feet tall. :) His ability to get layups in the pro's will be very limited by his height (I'd guess he's closer to 5'10).
Right now we're sitting at the fifth pick in the draft if the lottery falls according to the standings, but that also means we could end up picking as low as seven or maybe even eight or nine if the t-wolves slip up and the warriors "accidentally" lose the majority of their remaining games.
Do you trade down if you get the seventh pick or lower?
agreed . . .
You know who I love? And I'm not just saying this because I watched him last night and he was good... Patty Mills.
That guy can play.
excellent article and debate in the Ball don't lie article . . .
I like Ty Lawson alot - if you are going to run he is your point guard . . . outside of Rubio, is is probably the best pure PG out there . . . I've read that Jennings is too raw, and Curry is probably not quick enough to play starting PG in the pros . . .
I love this time of year . . .